Poll: Additional Stretch Goals

As we enter the last two weeks of the pledge campaign, we’re continuing to look at ways to make sure Squadron 42 and Star Citizen are the game you want to play. To that end, we’re preparing to roll out a more comprehensive set of stretch goals… and, as usual, we would like the community’s input. What do YOU think we could plan to add to our campaign?

One big topic we’ve seen discussed is support for additional platforms: OSX, LInux and the like. Because of how CryENGINE 3 works we don’t yet know if this will be possible… but we’d like to know how strong an interest there is! If this is a deciding factor for you, select that option in the poll to let us know which platform you’d like to see supported below.

Localization seems to be another big request. We plan to launch the game in English, French, Spanish and German and support further options as time goes on… but would it help to see the game offered in additional languages? If so, which languages do you think should be added first?

Other options include more ‘rewards’ for players (ships, upgrades, credits, etc.), more gameplay modes and a bigger game world. An enhanced FPS mode would give you more options for the boarding actions (more weapons, customizable armor, deeper mechanics.) A tactical mode could allow capital ship crews to oversee fighters engaged in battle. Obviously those all sound great… but which is the most important?

Finally, possibly the most important option on this poll is “other”: please, tell us YOUR ideas for possible stretch goals! You can make your voice heard by posting here in the comments or by voting in the formal poll at the RSI Comm-Link.

Comments

When I mean WALKING around in cities (in my post 3 posts down), I really urge the developers (and anyone else) to grab a copy of Precursors and play it if they haven't already. RSI would only benefit from the experience =)

This is a game that I flat out will not be able to play unless it's ported to Linux (greatly preferred) or OS X.

I really loved the Wing Commander series. I actually played the first one all the way through on a PC that was 40MHz instead of 33MHz without a speed limiter. I didn't understand why it was so slow and easy on other people's computers until I read about speed limiters. :-)

jup, what brody said. please dont release a half-finished product. id rather have more polish than tons of extras. as to locatlization: we are fine with english in germany. better than terrible translations and sad voice acting.

If the solution ends up being supporting Linux/OSX via Cedega/Cider/Crossover, I'll be supporting some other project happily that does this support.

Real native software with a crossplatform game engine I'll support happily and buy more content for. I'd also prefer to hear that the support for crossplatform is certain before giving my money away and not hear a few months later that "Hey, sorry, we couldn't do it after all".

I would like you to forget about extras and add ons, and just make the content that you have already promised, PERFECT. Splitting your focus means not being able to refine all the perfect little details. So i do not want more content I want perfect content. If you get everything down right, then, and only then as a bonus maybe start working on content for later. You have received all this support just on what you promised already, Deliver that, and you can worry about the rest later.

If you do create an advanced FPS mode I think gravity should be dynamic. If a ship or a ship section loses power then it should not have gravity. There are plenty of ways to work around zero gravity for players such as seat belts, jet packs, teleporters, turbolifts, rail-mounted motorized handles. I'm not suggesting you do all of these, just presenting options. If there is FPS combat that leads to the conclusion that there is injury and death. Related to that I rhetorically ask, are there combat augmentations, medical bays to heal, cloning for respawns or perma death? In any case, because of all this I agree with Brian, that if implementing a complete and thoughtful FPS at the same time as the space combat would detract from one or both then you should wait to develop it.

I will add my voice to those who suggest focusing on core game play. I really like the idea of having additional modes modes in the game, tactical, FPS, whatever. I would just prefer to see it done at a later date, once the base game is solid and sharp as a razor.

A further suggestion I have is this: please do not lose focus of the single-player aspects of this game. There are several other suggestions from people that deal with multiplayer and MMO aspects of the game. All very cool suggestions, and things I might want to mess with once in a blue moon. However, I personally do not have the time of talent to compete with the wide world. I would hate for the game to become so concentrated on the multiplayer/MMO side that the lone wolves out there who just want to put around by themselves, explore and enjoy the game universe are forgotten.

What would be great is in this persistant world, to be able to attack or use diplomacy to gain (planets/orbital stractures/stations/ships/etc...). The "Mothership" would be able to scan galaxies to seek for these goals (or new mining asteroids, or ruins to salvage, etc...) As the "Mothership" is movable with tools (1st player mode, Star Trek like command center) the squadrons of smaller ships could be deployed from the mothership and would be wielded with standard Wing commander control mode. A Squadron could be multiplayer coop, and each player could move an meet themself freely inside the "Mothership".

A sort of a mix of gamestyles (mount and blade for the freedom in a persistant universe / Civilisation 5 for the diplomacy and attack gestion / Wing commander for vessel fight)
In this way, those who like to pull the strings, play with strategy and diplomacy could play inside the "Mothership" designing new flight map, objectives and strategy. Those who prefer action could just grab a fighter and blast the enemies.

I was torn between "enhanced FPS mode" and "other" (which I went with, as the wording on the poll is giving hints that it would only be for style purposes). I don't really fancy more weapons for tuning the looks of my character, but if I get to use them now that's a whole different thing. What I would actually like the FPS mode to be useful for other than graphical uses. In other words, if you get to sneak into ship you can try to take over it (small ship, flying black and sneaks up to another ship while avoiding it's sensors, and the party within takes over the other one if successful, gets killed if not..). At least on the single player mode / Squadron 42.
Not so sure how it would change game mechanics if it becomes player vs player (or group vs group in battleships etc, where you would have possibility for small "raid" party to try to take over the ship) as well - although ships probably would have "hull breach" alarm or something at the very least, so the player owning the ship would have a chance to notice that someone came in (in order for them to know that hey I might need to set the autopilot on and defend my ship & myself before someone sneaks up and kill me in the cockpit while I fly). But for sure would allow for some fancy tactics and specializations (and makes a lot more reason to get ACTUAL crew into bigger ship - real players will be better than bots for sure.

I know, probably this remains only a dream.. it would be heckuva lot to do. Other choices were for linux support and tactical mode - the latter fitting especially well with this one. Having both FPS and Tactical / strategic combat -both well done- in a space sim sounds like a really awesome game (or maybe already simulated world, that would just be really immersive due to being able to act in so many roles and having realistic options + jobs to do). We can dream right ? =D

I think a tactical mode for organizing larger battles is the most important thing you can do to give the game extra depth. The ability for a commander on a larger ship to see the state of the battle and make meaningful decisions by commanding and organizing individual pilots, or squadrons of pilots, would be critical. But I think it goes beyond this to general pilot-to-pilot communication as well.

The pilot-to-pilot communication needs to be really effective in order for larger battles to be fun. It would be nice to be able to have a small group of 4 fighters, with one pilot designated as the leader, with the ability to take command (or request to take command) of his wingmen to fly in very tight formations, then they could break off and cause havoc as they close in their target.

It would be great to be able to have a functioning command structure. So, the commander on a carrier could see the general state of the battle, and assign strategic goals to specific squadrons in the field. The squadron commanders could then relay the command, and give more detailed goals to the individual pilots in their command.

The ability for pilots to form squadrons ad-hoc and communicate amongst each other would be incredible. I feel like this is the biggest thing lacking in most "team-based" multiplayer games today, no real team mechanics.

I would love to see the game support linux. Mac would be nice but I won't be playing it on a mac. A stretch goal could be a key for a free week or two that we could give to a friend to join us upon release. Or perhaps an alpha/beta key we can give to a friend who buys the game but is late for the kickstarter (assuming they won't have access to beta). More space currency is always nice, or a discount on items on launch, or some kind of boost on experience or money, etc. but is temporary.

I'm really into the idea of the tactical mode and FPS boarding actions. Both are really going to add such a great depth to the space sim. I would like to see them be optional though. I can see many people loving to do a game like this on a Saturday but some servers might just want a 1 hour play on a weeknight.

As a OSX user I am backing knowing full well I'm pretty much SOL for Mac support, that said please consider there are more like me on the Mac/Linux side willing to help you guys have a better game on PC and hopefully a few of you out there give us a nod and boost in votes.

- No inbalancing rewards please. If there are too many players with start benefits, the people without them will dislike.
- Rewards should be just optical (like they do it in dota2)
- more economic posibilitys. Clans should be able to buy Factorys for crafting and endproducts like rockets and repair parts, fuel (could be boosters without fuel you get slower but not to zero)
-Starbases / Factorys destroyable from npc or other clans. Like: Clan announce a raid, the defending clan gehts a warning that he may defend his base, because in 2 days there will be a raid.
- The place to build depends. Example: Near Asteroids its good for Building, repairing. Near by Stars or fogs ist good for energie, food, weapons.

Sorry for my bad english. Just some thoughts. Focus on an open world and player interactions (factions, pvp with makro effects like territorial fights)

Yes Tomi i agree, I just think that a simple tactical mode made for or 2 people to use at once on large ships, like carriers would be handy for organizing large amounts of people. It wouldn't be used to frequently, but if 2 large factions form and they go to war, they are going to want a way to organize and command their fleets with ease. Mining and exploring and stuff is also entirely optional and nothing i plan on doing at all too.

I just want this to be the space sim wing commanders have been. If you want to add some additional crazy stuff please add them as dlc. If you really have to add something then campaing with multiple paths and more ships to go with that. Remember kids in some cases less is more.

Some tactical mode for the people on the carrier to help organize large fleets of ships seems essential to have in. If you can get someone to organize troops and tactically order them around then you have a much higher chance that you will be victorious in battles. Just the ability to order squads and individual ships around possess a huge advantage for you.

I love all of these stretch goals and ideas, but would like to point to the cautionary tale that is Star Trek Online: They went big on this one, tackling space and ground exploration and combat, ship customization, multiple factions, player starbases, etc. Their first public release wasn't fantastic at any of it. They've improved over time, but still play catch up. (Note: This is meant to be an example, not a prediction. As I've been playing since the closed beta, I feel like I have a good perspective on that game's progress).
Cyco-Dude, None, and others have pointed out the importance of rock-solid core components and I agree. Something like enhanced FPS would be an amazing content patch down the road, so no need to rush. Obviously the industry is full of examples where rush jobs go terribly.
A top-notch, physics heavy Wing Commander-style game with deep customization and attention to deal is the game I'm backing, no question. If, down the road, you have the resources to bring me more, do it do it do it. But I'm not in a hurry, so hopefully everyone on this game won't be either.
My last two cents: I spent four years in the Navy doing maintenance in the propulsion plant of an aircraft carrier. Maintenance is not fun. It's boring, arduous, usually involves a lot of time spent cleaning and finding tools. I don't doubt that you could make some minigames that are fun, but are they so fun you'll spend hours playing? (Eg: Did you spend hours playing just the hacking minigames in Mass Effect or Bioshock?) This is a space sim first, we'll get minigames later.

Other? The ability to do some awesome stuff:
- like sneaking in an enemy cargo bay when they launch a fighter, steal stuff, or explode a bomb in main engineering.
- like landing on planets, exploring them, maybe building a base there.
- creating your own faction
- 'player housing' buildable space station, in a location of the player's choice that's almost impossible to guess but reachable normally (like half hour flight from regular station x on vector 345 by 221) Once you linked your nav computer there you can jump there through hyperspace.
- ability to assist station and capital shi-p defense not just by manning turrets but by doing 'cool stuff' at shield console, engineering, helm, torpedo etc. Think Star Trek :)
Like

on topic, i hope rsi is smart enough to limit their scope. just making a new "wing commander" or "privateer" is hard enough, now you're thinking about all of these additional elements? sure, enhanced fps and taccom might be cool...but do them AFTER the game is done, is selling well and making money.

if you try to make a game for everyone, you'll just end up with a disappointing mess.

@james
kickstarters always slow down during the middle (go look at any of them on kicktraq). over the last seven days, we've averaged 24k on this kickstarter per day and have been consistently getting 50k per 20 hours (ks and rsi combined). 4M total and 1.25M on kickstarter are very plausible, and i'd be happy with those.

@wodmatte
I wish the world worked that way. Sadly though a lot of countries have some ridiculous need to have everything in their own language. (Hello Germany, Spain, Italy....) Thankfully someone once decided that subtitles was the way to go in Norway ;)

@Aletheides
Goody. Makes sense that it is a DirectX issue since the rest of Cryengine is likely C++/C code. Even so i get why they alone don't want to rewrite everything themselves. Would be a massive reverse engineering task if one had no knowledge of the deeper mechanics in the engine.

Improved FPS an Tactical command ought to brig the most depth to the game in my opinion. We can always add ships and systems later, but designing those in from the start lets us get them right during beta.

How about no more locked stretch goals? Locked stretch goals are counter productive as they cause potential backers to wonder whether they are truly extras or whether your base goal is not enough to make a complete game, which discourages pledging.

@Anders: They are. On AMA he posted that the server side is already able to run on Linux however the client arent due to directX but they are talking to crytek about openGL. They also have a source code license to Cryengine so they can basically change whatever they want.

English is my only language, so I have no personal need to see new languages added in, but it would greatly increase your market size, so I'm all for it.

I agree with the comments about being able to walk around inside your own ship, maybe be able to do some minor repairs, maintenance, etc. would be amazing.
Also, if it isn't in the game design already, the ability to hire AI mercenaries to fly as your wingman on missions. That is, if it can be done without causing to many balancing issues.

@Yathushan Sivarajah
Good points however cut scenes in a multiplayer game would really mess up the flow of things. Say I'm entering a fighter ready to depart and suddenly i get some pointless cut scene interrupting me. Would be much cooler if say the boarding party entered the hangar deck and i had to fly around them or could possibly try and shot them on my way out. The cut scenes would be even more of a hassle for those who have already left the ship or are manning turrets. They might work in Squadron 42, but even there i really don't want anything messing up the flow of the game.

Cheaper to maintain the buggy mess that is cider vs having lean, native code? The performance aspect alone makes cider/cedega useless for this game. If it's not a native version they shouldn't even bother. I'd love to hear the rationale behind not going for a platform-agnostic engine from the get-go to be honest; I don't like supporting developers who seem to think PC and Windows are synonyms...